Poll: No-kids-allowed movement. Yay or nay?

Beautiful End

New member
Feb 15, 2011
1,755
0
0
So I was reading this [http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/the-no-kids-allowed-movement-is-spreading-2516110/]article a while back. I'm sure most of us are already familiarized with this topic, but I'd like to know what everyone thinks.

Personally, I agree with this ban. There are just some places where there shouldn't be any kids, some of the ones that come to mind are restaurants (With the exception of fast food places and kids' dinners) and the movies.
I recall going to Olive Garden a while back to celebrate my mother's birthday. it was all pleasant and fun until a family sat behind us. The kid kept yelling and banging the table and even pulled my mother's hair once. What did the mom do? She just wiggled her winger, muttered an apology and continued to allow the kid to do whatever he wanted. Same thing with the movies: I was having fun watching Pirates, immersed in the movie and having some popcorn when a kid started crying. He cried and cried and cried and the mother finally got the hint and...patted the kid on the back. Surprisingly enough, that didn't work! She didn't step out or anything, no. God forbid she misses 5 minutes off the movie for bringing her kid to a movie that they wouldn't enjoy/understand/care for.

So I say yay to this rule. There are just some places that annoying kids shouldn't be allowed to go. Notice the keyword: annoying. I don't hate kids. Hell, I was one once. But what really pisses me off is annoying children and their dumb mothers who don't know how to handle their child. And sadly, those are multiplying by the minute. So my rules is: When your kid starts annoying someone else other than you (Parents), then it becomes a problem. My problem. So don't get all moody if I attempt to take matters into my hands.

I'm slightly worried that this ban will go as far as to ban kids off public places (I don't want kids invading my home's privacy but I also don't think they should be caged or something). But I don't think people would allow that. I do see controversy in the horizon regarding this, though.

How about you, Escapists?

Spoons:
-Do you agree with this rule?
-Do you hate this rule/does this rule affect you?
-Do you think this is absurd or necessary?
-Do you wish to see this movement gain more support? Or not?
-Etc?
 

the spud

New member
May 2, 2011
1,408
0
0
No. Parents have a difficult enough time trying to get out of the house already without having to find and pay for a sitter. Also, your whole annoying child only tactic doesn't seem like it could practically work, as it would be difficult to determine what constitutes as "annoying".
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
I'm rather for it. Mostly because I don't like little children in general.
But also because they do truly become nuisances in public places far too often.
It's not necessary, but by God do I approve of it.
 

MASTACHIEFPWN

Will fight you and lose
Mar 27, 2010
2,279
0
0
I do not agree with this rule.
From what I read, I don't think it effects me
I find it absurd
I hope it gains no moar.

It is the choice of the parent of how to raise the kid. Not the mall/store/airline.
Some people don't have the money to pay someone to watch a kid, and maybe rich people want to take their kid on a fancy vacation with them. We learn via experence, and that's all i'm saying.
 

likalaruku

New member
Nov 29, 2008
4,290
0
0
Yes yes yes. & in compensation to the parents, both teen boys & teen girls will be forced to take Babysitting 101 instead of Home Ec in Jr. High. The new abundance of sitters will mean more backup plans, more availability, less trip cancellations, & lower competitive prices.

I saw one lady who knew how to deal with her little brat in public. It was at the mall; a grown woman got on the floor & started kicking & banging the floor with her fists, & to her daughter she said "THIS IS WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE!!" This was met with applause.
 

Terminate421

New member
Jul 21, 2010
5,773
0
0
Depends on the location.

It totally depends on the situation that affects my feeling towards children. But then again, one woman brought eight 3 year olds to see Transformers 3. I think I heard more bangs and explosions from them than the explosive movie I went to see. Why? Because they would not shut the fuck up.
 

Shoggoth2588

New member
Aug 31, 2009
10,250
0
0
HEY! You double posted this topic!!

I don't like children...I really don't...So of course I'm in favor of the proposal! Earlier this morning at work there was a kid who must have been in the clothes section (I work in Target you see) I was clear across the store in housewares and for 15 - 20 minutes straight I hear screaming and, pounding and, crying. For 15 to 20 minutes. If I was a manager I'd have asked the parent to take the kid outside or leave.

I'm not saying kids should be banned from Target or any store really (well, some stores obviously aren't for kids) but I'm living in a family of police vets. Not too long ago that kind of thing was considered disturbing the peace and this morning the peace was disturbed by a little kid. There are certain places kids just shouldn't go.

This rule doesn't effect me since I'm not a parent and won't be having kids
I can see the necessity of this sort of rule
I don't see the movement gaining much support though. That's too bad though...

Children aside, you should really be more careful about double-posting...
 

feather240

New member
Jul 16, 2009
1,921
0
0
the spud said:
No. Parents have a difficult enough time trying to get out of the house already without having to find and pay for a sitter. Also, your whole annoying child only tactic doesn't seem like it could practically work, as it would be difficult to determine what constitutes as "annoying".
Then ban all kids under the age limit.
 

Beautiful End

New member
Feb 15, 2011
1,755
0
0
the spud said:
No. Parents have a difficult enough time trying to get out of the house already without having to find and pay for a sitter. Also, your whole annoying child only tactic doesn't seem like it could practically work, as it would be difficult to determine what constitutes as "annoying".
I suppose what I would do if I had a business like that is create a rule that states "Annoying children will be evacuated. No exceptions" or something like that. I admit not all children are annoying and it would be unfair to exclude ALL kids just because of a few rude ones.
So in case a kid starts being annoying, he gets a prompt warning. After that, it's the boot. But that's just me.
 

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
I'm in approval of it. If you've paid first class, its like paying for the airline to make your trip as relaxing and stress free as possible. How can they do that with kids ruining that.

Ideally though, they should make a first class for people with kids. That way parents aren't left out. Why you would pay that much to take your kid on first class anyway baffles me. In fact, I think having kid free zones would work really well. Take one theater room and make it a kid free zone. Charge an extra fiver for it. All the people who want to go watch "The A Team" without kids screaming over it (yeah, my experience, it sucked) can go see that and in an ideal world they can use the extra money to have dedicated rooms for people with kids.

ITS GENIUS I SAY.
 
Aug 25, 2009
4,611
0
0
I'm a bit eh, but mostly I don't agree. Some of my earliest and fondest memories are of going out with my grandparents and parents. My Grandparents in particular used to take me to this restaurant that had children's meals that had containers shaped like policeman-dogs and cat-burglars, and so every lunchtime my granddad would tell me stories using these lunches. If I knew that someone was trying to or had managed to deprive me or another child of those sorts of memories (my grandparents died before I was ten, some of these memories are literally all I remember of them) then I would be so far beyond pissed at those people.

But then again, even at age five or six (and my parents insist even younger than that) I was apparently a quiet and polite child who understood that a restaurant was for your indoor voice, and not running around in either. I think that the problem here is not the children, but parents who can't control or haven't taught their children properly, and I don't think it's fair to deny children the chance to understand what it means to be an adult, and to 'feel grown-up,' as my parents used to say, just because some idiot parents don't understand about proper child rearing.

SO in short, no, I don't agree, and I think that the only people who genuinely agree with this are actually the selfish ones in this equation.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
I really hate the 'rents who don't do anything about their children in public

And hey, if a business thinks having children in an area is bad for business, they are well within their rights to say "No kids".
 

Beautiful End

New member
Feb 15, 2011
1,755
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
SO in short, no, I don't agree, and I think that the only people who genuinely agree with this are actually the selfish ones in this equation.
Well, I wouldn't consider myself selfish (I know you don't mean someone in specific) but I half favor this rule because it seems more parents nowadays just don't care about their children and allowed them to do whatever they want.

I have a friend who allows his kid to literally slap him around. The kid is 4 years old.

Like you said, it would be unfair for well educated children to be deprived off stuff just because there's an abundance of annoying children (As far as I recall, I was a polite kid too and my mother would have never allowed me to throw a tantrum in public). So I guess I would favor the rule if, and only if, it made exceptions with well educated children.

I gotta edit this. Hmm.. *Goes do that*
 

Laser Priest

A Magpie Among Crows
Mar 24, 2011
2,013
0
0
No.

I hate the kids, and would like to hit them if I could.

Still, I don't think it's fair to ban them from places for the convenience of everybody else.
 

feather240

New member
Jul 16, 2009
1,921
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
I'm a bit eh, but mostly I don't agree. Some of my earliest and fondest memories are of going out with my grandparents and parents. My Grandparents in particular used to take me to this restaurant that had children's meals that had containers shaped like policeman-dogs and cat-burglars, and so every lunchtime my granddad would tell me stories using these lunches. If I knew that someone was trying to or had managed to deprive me or another child of those sorts of memories (my grandparents died before I was ten, some of these memories are literally all I remember of them) then I would be so far beyond pissed at those people.

But then again, even at age five or six (and my parents insist even younger than that) I was apparently a quiet and polite child who understood that a restaurant was for your indoor voice, and not running around in either. I think that the problem here is not the children, but parents who can't control or haven't taught their children properly, and I don't think it's fair to deny children the chance to understand what it means to be an adult, and to 'feel grown-up,' as my parents used to say, just because some idiot parents don't understand about proper child rearing.

SO in short, no, I don't agree, and I think that the only people who genuinely agree with this are actually the selfish ones in this equation.
For starters, you can't say it denies people potential memories, people have fond memories of the weirdest events. By letting them in you could be taking away some bonding moment two people had while walking home.

It would be selfish to force "good" children out, but it would also be selfish to let parents be annoyed because a certain negligent someones sweet little darling can't shut their trap.

I think the important thing to remember here is that there's a very big difference between a law and a rule. A law is enforced by the state and is mandatory. A rule is up to the owners discretion. So why shouldn't some places have a rule?
 

Tiger Sora

New member
Aug 23, 2008
2,220
0
0
Since I don't have kids, nor ever plan to and will do my best not to. I like kids and all. Some crying kid in *insert random location* is rather bothersome. I approve of kid free zones. Or as the op made the example of the movie treater. I'd yell at the parents that their child is ruining the film for everyone and to please leave until the kid will behave.
 

kebab4you

New member
Jan 3, 2010
1,451
0
0
An all out ban I don't really agree to, throw the fuckers+it´s family out when they do start being annoying I can support. And the ban on that McDonald restaurant seem a bit far fetch.

Should get all these lazy parents that let there kid do as they want to shape up a bit.